Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Forums
Non-Cattle Specific Topics
Coffee Shop
Who is a Hypocrite
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support CattleToday:
Message
<blockquote data-quote="greybeard" data-source="post: 1365209" data-attributes="member: 18945"><p>1. The constitution grants very few rights--most are considered natural and unalienable rights--all the constitution does (in most instances) is prevent the govt from abridging those natural rights. The constitution simply 'guarantees' rights that already exist. </p><p></p><p>2. To answer your question tho--No. Stated better than I can:</p><p><em>The Constitution does distinguish in some respects between</em></p><p><em>the rights of citizens and noncitizens: the right not to be discriminatorily</em></p><p><em>denied the vote and the right to run for federal elective</em></p><p><em>office are expressly restricted to citizens. All other rights, however,</em></p><p><em>are written without such a limitation. The Fifth and Fourteenth</em></p><p><em>Amendment due process and equal protection guarantees</em></p><p><em>extend to all "persons." The rights attaching to criminal trials,</em></p><p><em>including the right to a public trial, a trial by jury, the assistance</em></p><p><em>of a lawyer, and the right to confront adverse witnesses, all apply</em></p><p><em>to "the accused." And both the First Amendment's protections</em></p><p><em>of political and religious freedoms and the Fourth Amendment's</em></p><p><em>protection of privacy and liberty apply to "the people."</em></p><p><em></em></p><p><em>Accordingly, the Supreme Court has squarely stated that neither</em></p><p><em>the First Amendment nor the Fifth Amendment "acknowledges</em></p><p><em>any distinction between citizens and resident aliens." For more</em></p><p><em>than a century, the Court has recognized that the Equal Protection</em></p><p><em>Clause is "universal in [its] application, to all persons within</em></p><p><em>the territorial jurisdiction, without regard to differences of ...</em></p><p><em>nationality." The Court has repeatedly stated that "the Due</em></p><p><em>Process Clause applies to all 'persons' within the United States,</em></p><p><em>including aliens, whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful,</em></p><p><em>temporary, or permanent."When noncitizens, no matter what</em></p><p><em>their status, are tried for crimes, they are entitled to all of the </em></p><p><em>rights that attach to the criminal process, without any distinction</em></p><p><em>based on their nationality.</em></p><p></p><p>As James Madison himself argued,</p><p>those subject to the obligations of our legal system ought to</p><p>be entitled to its protections:</p><p><em>It does not follow, because aliens are not parties to the Constitution,</em></p><p><em>as citizens are parties to it, that whilst they actually</em></p><p><em>conform to it, they have no right to its protection. Aliens are</em></p><p><em>not more parties to the laws, than they are parties to the Constitution;</em></p><p><em>yet it will not be disputed, that as they owe, on one</em></p><p><em>hand, a temporary obedience, they are entitled, in return, to</em></p><p><em>their protection and advantage.</em></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="greybeard, post: 1365209, member: 18945"] 1. The constitution grants very few rights--most are considered natural and unalienable rights--all the constitution does (in most instances) is prevent the govt from abridging those natural rights. The constitution simply 'guarantees' rights that already exist. 2. To answer your question tho--No. Stated better than I can: [i]The Constitution does distinguish in some respects between the rights of citizens and noncitizens: the right not to be discriminatorily denied the vote and the right to run for federal elective office are expressly restricted to citizens. All other rights, however, are written without such a limitation. The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment due process and equal protection guarantees extend to all "persons." The rights attaching to criminal trials, including the right to a public trial, a trial by jury, the assistance of a lawyer, and the right to confront adverse witnesses, all apply to "the accused." And both the First Amendment's protections of political and religious freedoms and the Fourth Amendment's protection of privacy and liberty apply to "the people." Accordingly, the Supreme Court has squarely stated that neither the First Amendment nor the Fifth Amendment "acknowledges any distinction between citizens and resident aliens." For more than a century, the Court has recognized that the Equal Protection Clause is "universal in [its] application, to all persons within the territorial jurisdiction, without regard to differences of ... nationality." The Court has repeatedly stated that "the Due Process Clause applies to all 'persons' within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent."When noncitizens, no matter what their status, are tried for crimes, they are entitled to all of the rights that attach to the criminal process, without any distinction based on their nationality.[/i] As James Madison himself argued, those subject to the obligations of our legal system ought to be entitled to its protections: [i]It does not follow, because aliens are not parties to the Constitution, as citizens are parties to it, that whilst they actually conform to it, they have no right to its protection. Aliens are not more parties to the laws, than they are parties to the Constitution; yet it will not be disputed, that as they owe, on one hand, a temporary obedience, they are entitled, in return, to their protection and advantage.[/i] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Non-Cattle Specific Topics
Coffee Shop
Who is a Hypocrite
Top